Comments

hello,

i love towleroad and its eclectic offerings, but i must say that i've raised an eyebrow twice over the past two weeks at your use of language in headlines. in this post, you link up a great video by two transgender friends, but offensively refer to them as 'transsexual,' a term that is not only presumptuous (did you watch the video?) but derogatory. likewise, you recently questioned lady gaga's gender in a post with the outdated and equally offensive term 'hermaphrodite.' while our transgender brothers and sisters are a more visible part of our community, people who are intersex also often identify as queer and feel most welcome in the lgbtq community.

i challenge you to read up on the language you use, and be sensitive to all of your readers. you're a huge advocate of exposing homophobia and you tout your win for best lgbt blog, so please try to offer up the intelligent, sensitive, and inclusive language you're surely capable of. i expect to read the words 'transsexual' and 'hermaphrodite' on fox news, not towleroad.

thanks for your attention.

xo.

Posted by: john | Aug 17, 2009 5:45:34 PM

p.s. i realize that the videomakers refer to themselves at 'transexual' [sic] in the title card, so perhaps you're going with what they provided. (not sure if they were being humorous and/or you were also.) while they are obviously free to use whichever term they prefer and identify with, i've found that in working with major lgbtq organizations and talking with transgender friends, 'transgender' is the preferred word. anyone else care to chime in/correct me? xo.

Posted by: john | Aug 17, 2009 6:12:53 PM

Cong. Murphy is clearly sincere about wanting to undo the damage DADT discharges do both to the lives of individuals and our nation's security, and we are exceedingly lucky that he is now the lead sponsor of the repeal bill in the House.

So, I'm confidant it is just a matter of time before he understands that:

"Congress has authorized the President, via statute, to suspend any law regarding military separations during national security emergencies. Hence, an executive order would not be a matter of the President choosing to 'not enforce a law' but an appropriate exercise of executive authority granted directly by Congressional statute.

Hence, an executive order would be consistent with, not ignore, standing law."